[Noisebridge-discuss] [Rack] minotaur is down

Jonathan Lassoff jof at thejof.com
Mon Jul 8 07:02:15 UTC 2013


Methinks that's what's going on.
But yes, the lock is missing.

On Sunday, July 7, 2013, Henner Zeller wrote:

> On 7 July 2013 22:47, Jonathan Lassoff <jof at thejof.com <javascript:_e({},
> 'cvml', 'jof at thejof.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Now that I'm sure the baron->API->gateman request flow is good and
>> working, I stoppe by 2169 to check functionality.
>> I dialed a working code, and engaged the buzzer. It seems to be latching
>> now, which is good.
>>
>> However, the hardware lock is in a somewhat precarious position...
>>
>
> Hard to tell from the picture: is the lock missing ?
> There were reported problems with the lock earlier (key didn't engage), so
> maybe someone removed it to get some replacement ?
>
> -h
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, July 7, 2013, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
>>
>>> I should add a little more detail:
>>>
>>> Work is happening in the baron repo:
>>> https://github.com/noisebridge/noisebridge-baron/commits
>>> the gateman repo: https://github.com/noisebridge/gateman/commits
>>>
>>> And in the git repo in /etc on minotaur.
>>>
>>> To see the status of the barons, run:
>>>   sudo monit status baron_upstairs
>>>   sudo monit status baron_downstairs
>>>
>>> "status" can be replaced with "stop" and "start" to do that to the
>>> baron instance.
>>> The baron.py script now daemonizes and writes a pidfile to
>>> /var/run/baron_[instance].pid, where "instance" is an instance name
>>> passed to the daemon with "--instance" (e.g. "downstairs").
>>> By default the instance is "default".
>>>
>>> Hope this helps! Just needs to be tested! :p
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> jof
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Jonathan Lassoff <jof at thejof.com> wrote:
>>> > Ok, so, I added some monit configuration for the baron daemons, and
>>> > now everything will start automatically.
>>> > Monit will be a watchdog for the processes, re-starting them if they
>>> fail.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > jof
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Lassoff <jof at thejof.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Henner Zeller <h.zeller at acm.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> On 6 July 2013 02:26, Jonathan Lassoff <jof at thejof.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> First, gateman needs to come up.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I'm stuck interacting with the parallel port as a parallel port :(
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> open("/dev/usb/lp0", O_RDWR)            = 3
>>> >>>> ioctl(3, PPCLAIM, 0x7fff85442ba8)       = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate
>>> >>>> ioctl for device)
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It is one of these USB -> parallel port adaptors, so might not be
>>> 100%
>>> >>> compatible with a 'standard'  parallel port.
>>> >>> However, writing bytes to it should still work (if I understand
>>> correctly,
>>> >>> there is only one bit used to operate the buzzer ?)
>>> >>
>>> >> Yup -- those adapters/port emulators aren't good for any bit-banging
>>> >> operations that are timing-dependent.
>>> >>
>>> >> I took the conversation onto the rack@ mailing list.
>>> >>
>>> >> I ended up figuring out what was happening, the driver presented two
>>> >> interfaces, one as the raw port and the other as a line printer. I was
>>> >> using the line printer interface, and not the raw port access.
>>> >> We're all good (other than the downstairs buzzer hardware being
>>> broken) now.
>>> >>
>>> >> Cheers,
>>> >> jof
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20130708/d3f56033/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list